The Obama administration is quite worried about stereotyping Muslims as violence-prone terrorists. They fear that any acknowledgment that some Muslims commit acts of terror because they are religiously motivated (however twisted the terrorists' interpretation of Islam may be) is to encourage a backlash of intolerance (at best) and violence (at worst) against Muslim Americans.

It's not crazy to worry about anti-Muslim violence. There have been vicious attacks on innocent Muslims. Last November, a Queens, N.Y., man was stabbed six times as he stood outside his mosque by an attacker who shouted "F------ Muslim, I'll kill you." In the wake of the Boston bombing, a drunk Northern Virginia man reportedly attacked and broke the jaw of a cab driver (an Army reservist who served in Iraq and at Guantanamo) after snarling "If you're a Muslim, you're a (expletive) jihadist. You are just as bad as the rest of them."

The worst instance of what was probably intended as anti-Muslim violence was the August 2012 attack on a Sikh temple in Wisconsin. Sikhs, who wear turbans, are frequently mistaken for Muslims. Wade Michael Page opened fire in the temple, killing six and wounding four (including a police officer) before turning the gun on himself. Page reportedly had links to white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups.

Anti-Muslim bigotry clearly exists, as does bias against every other group or conceivable group in American society. Such bias is obviously misguided and counterproductive. It's also fairly uncommon.

According to the FBI's compilation of hate crime statistics, there were 1,480 incidents of religiously motived crimes in America in 2011. Of these, 63.2 percent were directed at Jews, 12.5 percent at Muslims and little over 9 percent at Catholics and Protestants. The rest were all over the map. This hardly constitutes a wave of anti-Muslim violence.

As Andrew McCarthy, who prosecuted the first World Trade Center bombers, has said regarding Muslims who serve their country: "Without them, we could not have infiltrated jihadist cells in New York and stopped terrorists from killing thousands of people. Without them, we could not have translated, understood and processed our evidence so it could be presented to a jury as a compelling narrative. Pro-American Muslims serve honorably in government, in our military, in our intelligence services and in our major institutions."

It's quite possible, likely in fact, that most Americans are aware of the distinction between the majority of Muslims who are law-abiding, patriotic and indispensible in the fight against Muslim extremism, and the small minority of Muslims who are Islamists. Doubtless most Americans, who are fair-minded, non-prejudiced people, vehemently condemn acts of bias or violence against Muslim Americans.

Can the Obama administration likewise acknowledge that exaggerated efforts to avoid the appearance of prejudice can lead to problems of its own? Can it now see that failing to take Maj. Nidal Hasan's progressively more radical religious views seriously as a security threat was a disaster? Does the administration recognize that its subsequent official description of the Fort Hood attack as "workplace violence" was a bad joke? Can it now admit that losing track of Tamerlane Tsarnaev, even after repeated warnings from the Russians and the Saudis and abundant evidence of his conversion to radical Islam, was a politically correct blunder?

This administration's efforts to deny that Islamism has anything to do terror have led it into embarrassing circumlocutions and denials. CIA Director John Brennan testified before Congress, "Our enemy is not 'terror' because terror is a state of mind, and as Americans we refuse to live in fear. Nor do we describe our enemy as 'jihadists' or 'Islamists' because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam." Brennan also expressed the hope that the Obama administration could "build up" the "more moderate elements within Hezbollah." If Hezbollah, an Iranian creation and dedicated terrorist Islamist organization is considered to contain moderates, it's no wonder that James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, described the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt as "largely secular."

It's fine for Americans to "refuse to live in fear." It's not fine for Obama administration to insist that we live in denial.

A lot of wishful thinking in this piece.......the silence of the muslim community speaks volumes about their intent. Seems to me a “moderate” muslim is one that simply does not understand his own religion.

5
posted on 05/03/2013 8:14:39 AM PDT
by Enten
(I don't have islamophobia...I do have islamonausea)

In a nation of 310 million, it probably is crazy to worry about anti-Moslem violence when all Mona can come up with is three examples spread over several years. And those three examples come from about 304 million non-Moslems directed at 5 or 6 million Moslems in the US.

And there have been dozens of plots and several actual terrorists acts by Moslems which killed more than 3,000, and the plotters had the hopes of killing hundreds or thousands more.

Mona didn't contribute anything to the general discourse with this column.

There is not a single lying liberal who ever backs up this phantom peaceful or moderate Muslim crap with any hard data.

It is all just PC BS. Repeat it often enough and the low/no information voter buys it hook, line, and sinker.

When the vast majority of what we see, read about are 6th century sand monkeys who have vowed to kill or dominate us and we rarely see a Muslim speaking out against the insanity then it is apparent that Islam is the problem and will remain a problem until it is eradicated from the planet earth.

I did not believe the ROP when Bush said it and I sure don’t believe when this DNA inferior pResident or his administration says it. It is not a religion and it is not peaceful. You have to be deaf dumb and blind, or the enemy within to think it is either one.

I think the problem is that you can not trust Muslims. Just take the attacks on 9/11 2001 for example. None of the Muslims here in the states did condemn the attacks, which makes most people assume that they approved of of the attack. Even if they did not

16
posted on 05/03/2013 8:44:02 AM PDT
by Kaslin
(He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)

It’s been 11.5 years since 9/11/01, and despite the 22,000 acts of terrorism committed around the world since then, we have yet to hear anybody in authority in the muslim “religion” condemning these acts. All we get is hand-wringing over the possible “backlash” which never occurs.

I am SICK of it.

21
posted on 05/03/2013 8:54:31 AM PDT
by left that other site
((Ban the ubiquitous and deadly solvent, Di-hydrogen monoxide!!!))

The Iranian ambassador to the UN had just finished giving a speech and walked out into the lobby where he met the United States ambassador, John Bolton.

They exchanged pleasantries and as they walked the Iranian said, "You know I have just one question about what I have seen in America."

Ambassador Bolton said, "Well anything I can do to help you, I will."

The Iranian whispered, "My son watches this show 'Star Trek' and in it there is Chekhov who is Russian, Scotty who is Scottish, and Sulu who is Chinese, but no Iranians. My son is very upset and doesn't understand why there aren't any Arabs or Muslims on Star Trek."

Bolton laughed, leaned toward the Iranian ambassador and whispered back, "It's because it takes place in the future."

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.